Santa Clara (CA) - For the quarter recently ended, IDC is reporting that for x86-based microprocessor marketshare, AMD gained 0.4% in worlwide sales coming in at 23.5% overall.  For the same period, Intel lost 0.4% to wind up at 76.3%.  Worldwide x86-based microprocessor sales increased 14.3% to end at $7.95 billion, an increase in revenue of 14.8%.  AMD's 0.4% increase came primarily from two segments, mobile and server as desktop remained basically flat.  Mobile sales increased 1.9% to 18.9% while server increased 0.7% to 13.9%.  Q3 represented the second consecutive quarter to have sales exceeding expectations.  Projections for Q4 are that seasonal increases will continue, while Q1 2008 will see the first falloff consistent with seasonal trends.

AMD continued to lose money in Q3, however.  The company posted $394 million in losses, following additional losses in excess of $500 million for the previous two quarters.  AMD's financial situation is improving, however.  Several analysts have predicted AMD could pull themselves out of the red in Q4.  AMD's CEO Hector Ruiz indicated that if AMD could sell $2 billion in Q4, they would be out of the red.

Read more ... IDC press release.

Volume comes in lowest end of the market....

Oct 25, 2007 20:41     

AMD has effectively sacrificed profitability in exchange for commanding marketshare. The bulk of AMD's marketshare inroads at this point comes in the lowest end of the market, where they must sell at a loss (obviously) to keep gaining. This model cannot continue in the long term, Intel simply walked away from a great deal of business that AMD was willing to pursue because it was not profitable.... taking 50% marketshare where the ASP generates negative cash flow is not an accomplishment that warrants healthy business.

Jack report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

sounds like BS

Oct 25, 2007 22:13     

But I still hear good news reguardless. So I do actually believe there is some long term progress.
enewmen report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

who's gonna pay R&D???

Oct 26, 2007 00:42     

based on IDF, Intel is engaged in heavy research initiatives. So they throw lot of money and resources for innovation. At the end of the day, Intel has to pay for them.. that's why Intel can't do much about lowering prices. However.. Intel products are much bang for the buck as of today.
Alien report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Market share at a cost...

Oct 26, 2007 02:21     

They gain a little market share, but they are slashing their prices and losing ALOT of money in the processor, whereas Intel is recording record profits...huh? AMD is the new PS3....lol!
Hiruu report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Volume, losses...

Oct 26, 2007 02:41     

@Jack: have you considered the price of a fab? Do you really believe that AMD sells 'at a loss'? While volume is the segment where margins are lower, it is also where revenue is potentially the highest (it's better to sell a million chips and make $2 of profit per chip than sell 100 chips with a $50 profit per chip). No, as it stands, commandeering the volume market allows AMD to cover the very, very high cost for new fabs, and for existing fabs' upkeep - which ain't cheap either.

Mitch 74 report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

mobile and server are NOT negative ASP!

Oct 26, 2007 04:03     

Jack, how can you say AMD is getting marketshare in negative ASP segments? Servers (and, less dramatically mobile platforms) have high ASP and much higher margins than desktops. Servers are where Intel and AMD collect most of the juice, and 13.9% in server segment with a 0.7% increase is a promising result for an AMD 10 times (or more) smaller than Intel.
Andrea report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

wait till 2008

Oct 26, 2007 07:52     

It is going to be a big ask for AMD to come out of the red in Q4 2007. They will slowly improve their balance sheets but, by Q2-Q3 they should be breaking even or posting small profits. I think AMD needs to stop trying to be everything to everyone and concentrate on certain high profit niches(for now). They need to strengthen ATI and continue to go after the mobile and server segments. Enthusiasts will probably roast me for saying this but AMD should forget about trying to go after the desktop crown for now. Work on chipsets, drivers, GPU, mobile solutions and solid desktop chips that have good profit margins, run cool,use less power and have good over clocking potential. All in all AMD has done well considering the financial strength and infrastructure of their competitor, Intel.

tobago report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Love AMD and Intel

Oct 26, 2007 08:00     

They keep each other moving forward. Hope AMD can come out with another money maker like the AthlonXP.
jonrs report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

R & D

Oct 26, 2007 08:40     

Alien, Just because AMD is not posting a profit doesn't mean they aren't innovating. The last time I checked (and this was before the AMD64 architecture) AMD's R&D budget was close to Intel's with fewer product lines to dilute it. Intel on the other hand spent about 70% of their budget on marketing. It sounds like Intel has changed that quite a bit, but I'm sure a big portion of every dollar spent on Intel products goes straight to marketing. AMD has always sacrificed marketing to keep their products competitive.

Shaun report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Being number 2

Oct 26, 2007 08:49     

Being number 2, AMD has to work harder. Apparently it is paying off. Intel should not rest on its laurels and take what they have done for granite.
TomLeeM/BigWarpGuy report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

I wouldnt worry about AMD

Oct 26, 2007 09:52     

This industry IS NOT going back to a single x86 vendor. We all remember quite clearly what intel used to charge before there was an AMD. There may be some restructuring. AMD may be snapped up by IBM or Samsung (hopefully the former) before this is all overwith. But gone? Not a chance. This industry will bail out AMD because it's cheaper than giving Intel singular control over this market segment. AMD will not be allowed to go bankrupt, regardless of the opinions you may hear to the contrary.

Scott report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Clash of the Titans?

Oct 26, 2007 11:13     

As Scott alluded to, perhaps AMD would be bought out by another, larger, corporation. Just imagine, AMD/ATI/IBM vs. Intel....DAMN!
Righteous Fury report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

.4% huh?

Nov 06, 2007 16:22     

Its not much but I guess its something. AMD is innovating in their own way but so far even their Native Quad hasn't been very powerful compared to Intels 2xDual Quad. But then again they do have a few other things such as Hyper-Transport and I think they will have SSE5 on later Phenoms. Shuan you have to remember this too, without marketing no one knows who you are or what you have to offer. I know they would rather innovate but the real reason Intel beat out IBM/Cyrix and the others is because they had a great product and the best marketing. Don't tell me you didn't love the Blue Man Group commercials. I always did. And even if IBM bought AMD they still don't have the same power as Intel. IBM has lost a lot in the past few decades. Hell the site I work at for CitiBank used to be an IBM site given to the U of A after they layed all of the people off. Now Samsung may change that but not for AMD. I think Intel may pose more of a threat in the GOU market than most think though.

Jimmy report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Re:Scott

Nov 06, 2007 19:26     

"We all remember quite clearly what intel used to charge before there was an AMD." How long has AMD been around? Hint - AMD was founded in 1969. What did Intel used to charge for CPU's back then? It is not as clear for me to remember as it seems to be for you. Perhaps you meant to say we all remember what Intel used to charge when AMD wasn't competitive? (Which is where we may be heading now)
joe report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0